Previous Page  130 / 391 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 130 / 391 Next Page
Page Background

NEWS LETTER 2 0 1 0

116

The Competition Board Decided that Several Chicken

Producers and the Association of White Meat Producers and

Breeders Union Distorted Competition by Establishing a Cartel

and thereby Sentenced them to Pay Fines

*

The Competition Board (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”), at

its discretion, sentenced nine leading undertakings, namely Abalıoğlu,

Banvit, Beypi, CP, Erpiliç, Keskinoğlu, Pak Tavuk, Şeker Piliç and Şen

Piliç to pay a fine of 0.8% of their gross income as accrued at the end

of the year 2008. Moreover, the Board had increased the fine of Pak

Tavuk depending on Zuhal Daştan’s- president of Association of White

Meat Producers and Breeders Union (hereinafter referred to as the “Besd-

Bir”) and president of Pak Tavuk- decisive influence on the violation and

warned Besd-Bir to abstain from behaviors which lend themselves to anti-

competitive practices.

I. Allegations

The Board has,

ex officio,

made an investigation into the alleged

agreements between 27 chicken producers which are restricting the amount

of supply and fixing prices, and into the allegations regarding Besd-Bir’s

enabling of such agreements.

II. Cartel inspection

In light of the documents found at the premises and informationobtained

from the parties as a result of the investigation, the Board determined that

some of the undertakings (i) agreed on increasing chicken prices, (ii)

engaged in activities to restrict the amount of supply, (iii) tried to increase

the transparency in the market by sharing confidential information and

future price lists with each other, and (iv) tried to restrict the production of

other chicken producers by suggesting their dealers make agreements with

dealers of other producers. In addition, the Board reached the conclusion

that Besd-Bir had acted in a way that enables such anti-competitive

practices and the coordination between the relevant undertakings.

The Board stated that these actions by the undertakings are examples

of a “cartel” within the scope of the Competition Law. The methods which

*

Article of April 2010